Swenson v. Board of Supervisors
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Kittson county, Grindeland, ]., denying a motion for a new trial, after a trial and verdict in favor of defendant.
1Opinion of the CourtJaggard, J.
This is an appeal from an order denying plaintiff’s motion for a new trial in a case wherein the plaintiff appealed to the district court from an order of the board of supervisors of the town of Hallock laying out a road over the plaintiff’s land, and wherein there was an award assessing the benefits as equal to the damages.
Among other grounds of benefit was the one placed in controversy by this appeal, namely, that, if the road was graded and ditched, it would drain land of plaintiff. The court charged the jury fully and distinctly that the only benefits which they could consider were…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hutt v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1890
- Trinity College v. City of HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1865
- Roberts v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1878
- Washington Ice Co. v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
- Whitely v. Mississippi Water Power & Boom Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Amory v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
- Hayne v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Mantorville Railway & Transfer Co. v. Teunis SlingerlandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- Murray v. SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
- Burg v. Township of RosedaleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919